Personality is a systemic social quality of an individual, which is formed in joint activities and communication. Management methods Systematic social quality acquired by an individual in activities
The most important prerequisite for substantiating the theory of management is the representation of the objects of management of socio-psychological management, people, as members of human society. This implies that the individual person must be considered as a person.
Personality in psychology denotes a systemic social quality acquired by an individual in objective activity and communication and characterizing the level and quality of representation of social relations in an individual.
As follows from the fact of non-coincidence, non-identity of the concepts of "individual" and "personality", the latter can only be understood in a system of stable interpersonal relationships that are mediated by the content, values, and meaning of joint activities for each of the participants. These interpersonal connections are real, but are "supersensual" in nature. They are manifested in specific individual properties and actions of people who are part of the collective, but they are not reducible to them. They form a special quality of the group activity itself, which mediates these personal manifestations that determine the special position of each individual in the system of interindividual relations and, more broadly, in the system of social relations.
The personality of each person is endowed only with its inherent combination of features and characteristics that form its individuality. Individuality is a combination of the psychological characteristics of a person that make up his originality, his difference from other people. Individuality is manifested in the traits of temperament, character, habits, prevailing interests, in the qualities of cognitive processes (perception, memory, thinking, imagination), in abilities, individual style of activity, etc. There are no two people with the same combination of these psychological characteristics - human personality unique in its individuality.
Just as the concepts "individual" and "personality" are not identical, personality and individuality, in turn, form a unity, but not an identity. The ability to add and multiply large numbers very quickly "in the mind", dexterity and determination, thoughtfulness, the habit of biting nails, laughter and other features of a person act as traits of his personality, but do not necessarily enter into the characterization of his personality, if only because they can be and not be represented in the forms of activity and communication that are essential for the group in which the individual possessing these traits is included. If personality traits are not represented in the system of interpersonal relations, then they turn out to be insignificant for assessing the individual's personality and do not receive conditions for development. Only those individual qualities that are most "drawn" into the leading activity for a given social community act as personal ones. The individual features of a person remain “silent” until a certain time, until they become necessary in the system of interpersonal relations, the subject of which will be this person as a person.
Natural, organic aspects and features exist in the structure of the individuality of the human personality as its socially conditioned elements. Natural (anatomical, physiological and other qualities) and social form a unity and cannot be mechanically opposed to each other as independent substructures of personality.
Thus, the structure of personality, first of all, includes the systemic organization of its individuality, represented in the structure of temperament, character, abilities of a person, necessary, but not sufficient for understanding the psychology of personality. Thus, the first component of the personality structure is singled out - its intra-individual (intra-individual) subsystem.
The personality, being the subject of a system of real relations with society, with the groups in which it is integrated, cannot be enclosed only in some kind of closed space within the organic body of the individual, but reveals itself in the space of interindividual relations. Not the individual in itself, but the processes of interpersonal interaction, which include at least two individuals (and in fact a community, group, collective), can be considered as manifestations of the personality of each of the participants in this interaction.
It follows from this that a person in the system of his "actual relations, as it were, acquires his own special being, which differs from the bodily being of an individual. The real existence of a person is found in the totality of the objective relationships of individuals mediated by their activities, and therefore one of the characteristics of the personality structure should be sought in " space" outside the organic body of the individual, which constitutes the interindividual subsystem of the personality.
It is noteworthy that by translating the consideration of the personality into an interindividual "space", we get the opportunity to answer the question of what the phenomena of the collective are: collectivist self-determination, collectivist identification, etc. What is it: proper group or personal manifestations? When the characteristics and the very existence of a personality are not closed "under the skin" of an individual, but are taken out into an inter-individual "space", the false alternative generated by the identification of the concepts "individual" and "personality" (either personal or group) is overcome. The personal acts as a manifestation of group relationships, the group acts in a concrete form of personality manifestations.
Studies on the systematic approach in science have shown that the most important characteristic of each system is its structure. Structure - "a set of stable links between many components of an object that ensure its integrity." The development of a scientific understanding of the structure of personality is a prerequisite for the creation of a holistic theory capable of revealing the social essence of a person in all the diversity of its manifestations. Among social scientists (primarily among psychologists), a generally accepted understanding of the socio-psychological structure of personality has developed. In particular, it is possible to consider the approach, connected with the allocation of orientation, character, temperament and abilities in the personality, as well-established in psychology. Scientists consider them as complex structures of properties that together constitute a common system that characterizes a holistic personality. At the same time, they designate orientation as a system of needs, interests, and ideals; temperament - as a system of natural properties; abilities - as an ensemble of intellectual, volitional and emotional properties and, finally, character - as a synthesis of attitudes and ways of behavior.
The foregoing allows us to schematically depict the socio-psychological structure of the personality's behavior in the following way.
In the individual psychological differences between people, an important place is occupied by the so-called dynamic features of the psyche. First of all, we have in mind the degree of intensity of mental processes and states, as well as one or another speed of their course. As you know, with a relative equality of motives for behavior and activity, with the same external influences, people differ markedly from each other in impressionability, impulsiveness, and energy shown. So, one person is prone to slowness, the other to haste, one is characterized by the ease of awakening feelings, and the other by composure, one is distinguished by sharp gestures, expressive facial expressions, the other by restraint of movements, very little facial mobility. Differences in dynamic features appear - other things being equal - in the general activity of the individual, in his mainland and his emotionality.
Of course, the dynamic manifestations of a person can largely depend on educated attitudes and habits, on the requirements of the situation, etc. But there is no doubt that the individual differences in question have their own innate basis. This is confirmed by the fact that such differences are found already in childhood, appear in the most diverse spheres of behavior and activity, and are distinguished by particular constancy.
The dynamic features inherent in the individual are internally interconnected and form a peculiar structure. An individually unique, naturally conditioned set of dynamic manifestations of the psyche is called the temperament of a person.
The idea of \u200b\u200bwhat a person's temperament is usually formed on the basis of some psychological characteristics characteristic of a given person. A person with noticeable mental activity, quickly responding to surrounding events, striving for a frequent change of impressions, relatively easily experiencing failures and troubles, alive, mobile with expressive facial expressions and movements, is called a sanguine person. A person who is imperturbable, with stable aspirations and mood, with constancy and depth of feelings, with uniformity of actions and speech, with a weak external expression of mental states, is called a phlegmatic person. A person who is very energetic, capable of devoting himself to work with particular passion, fast and impetuous, prone to violent emotional outbursts and sudden mood swings, with rapid movements is called a choleric. An impressionable person, with deep feelings, easily vulnerable, but outwardly weakly responsive to the environment, with restrained movements and muffled speech, is called a melancholic. Each type of temperament has its own ratio of mental, primarily different degrees of activity and emotionality, as well as certain features of motor skills. A certain structure of dynamic manifestations characterizes the type of temperament.
It is clear that not all people can be divided into four types. The question of the diversity of temperaments has not yet been finally resolved in science. But these types are considered to be the main ones. In life, quite often there are people who can be attributed to one or another of these types.
Translated from Greek, “character” is “chasing, “sign”. Indeed, character is the special signs that a person acquires while living in society. imagination, ingenuity, etc.) and in the traits of temperament, it reveals itself in the traits of character.
Character is a set of stable individual characteristics of a person, which develops and manifests itself in activity and communication, causing typical behaviors for an individual.
A person's personality is characterized not only by what he does, but also by how he does it. Acting on the basis of common interests and beliefs shared by all, striving for common goals in life, people can discover in their social behavior, in their actions and deeds, not the same, sometimes opposite, individual characteristics. You can, along with other people, experience the same difficulties, fulfill your duties with equal success, love or not love the same thing, but at the same time be soft, compliant. , a friendly company, a labor or educational team, an asocial association, etc.). Depending on how the individualization of the personality is carried out in the reference group for it and what is the level of development of interpersonal relations in it, in a teenager, for example, openness, directness, courage, integrity, firmness of character can be formed in one case, in another case - hidden - carry, deceit, cowardice, conformity, weak character. In the team, as a group of a high level of development, the most favorable opportunities for development and consolidation of the best character traits are created. This process contributes to the optimal integration of the individual in the team and the further development of the team itself.
Abilities are such psychological characteristics of a person on which the success of acquiring knowledge, skills, skills depends, but which themselves cannot be reduced to the presence of this knowledge, skills and abilities. Otherwise, the grade on the exam, the answer at the blackboard, the successfully or unsuccessfully completed test work would make it possible to make a final conclusion about the person's abilities. Meanwhile, the data of psychological research and pedagogical experience indicate that sometimes a person who initially did not know how to do something and thus differed unfavorably from those around him, as a result of training, begins to master the skills of inability extremely quickly and soon overtakes everyone on the way to mastery. Bliss manifests greater abilities than others. Manifested in the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities, at the same time, abilities are not limited to knowledge and skills. Abilities and knowledge, abilities and skills, abilities and skills are not identical to each other. In relation to skills, abilities and knowledge, human abilities act as some kind of opportunity. Human abilities are only an opportunity to acquire skills and abilities.
So, abilities are individual psychological characteristics of a person, which are the conditions for the successful implementation of this activity and reveal differences in the dynamics of mastering the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for it. If a certain set of personality traits meets the requirements of the activity that a person masters over the time pedagogically reasonably allotted for its development, then this gives grounds to conclude that he has the ability for this activity. And if another person, ceteris paribus, does not cope with the requirements that the activity imposes on him, then this gives reason to assume that he does not have the corresponding psychological qualities, in other words, the lack of abilities. The latter does not mean, of course, that a person cannot acquire the necessary skills and knowledge at all, but only that the process of assimilation will be delayed, it will require significant efforts and time of teachers, extraordinary effort with relatively modest results. This does not exclude the possibility that abilities may develop over time.
Being individual psychological characteristics, abilities cannot be opposed to other qualities and personality traits - the qualities of the mind, memory features, character traits, emotional properties, etc., but must be put on a par with them. If any of these qualities or their combination meets the requirements of the activity or is formed under the influence of these requirements, then this gives every reason to consider this individual psychological feature of the personality as an ability.
Among the many qualities of a person that make up her individuality, the qualities of the intellect (mind) are essential. They are manifested in the features of a person's mental activity, in the specifics of his mental abilities. Mental abilities are a set of certain qualities that characterize the thinking of a given person. Such qualities of the mind include: curiosity, inquisitiveness, depth of thought, flexibility and mobility of the mind, logicality, evidence, critical thinking, etc.
Curiosity is understood as the desire of a person to learn something new that he encounters in life, work, and study. An inquisitive person is called a person who seeks to find out any object, event, to diversify into the main phenomena and causes that were previously unknown to him.
Depth of mind. This quality of intelligence is manifested in the ability of a person to reveal the essence of a particular phenomenon, in his ability to establish basic, essential connections between phenomena and within them.
Flexibility and mobility of the mind. These qualities characterize a person's ability to quickly disconnect from old connections in the analysis of events and quickly establish new relationships and connections, while being able to consider a phenomenon, a fact from an unusual point of view.
Logic. This quality of the mind characterizes the course of the thought process and is determined by the ratios of analysis - synthesis, a clear direction of the thinking process, its consistency, correspondence to the question posed, the correct comparison of general and particular problems.
Evidence and criticality of the mind reflect the ability of a person to justify his decision. A person's thinking acquires evidence and persuasiveness when he is able to give irrefutable arguments and facts to substantiate his decision.
The most important element of the socio-psychological structure of the personality is the will. Will is the regulating side of consciousness, expressed in the ability of a person to perform purposeful actions and deeds that require overcoming difficulties.
As you know, a volitional act is performed under conditions of a certain physical and psychological stress, i.e. volitional effort, which is characterized by an appropriate amount of energy expended not performing a purposeful action or, conversely, keeping from it. As psychological studies show, the intensity of a person's volitional effort, its strength and stamina depend on the worldview, the significance of the goal, the level of responsibility and strength of character (including the type of temperament).
The level of development of the will is manifested in the following basic volitional properties of the personality: purposefulness, determination, perseverance, endurance, independence.
Purposefulness is the ability of a person to set and achieve socially significant goals. A purposeful person has clear and distinct goals in life (work, study). Often this is a person obsessed with work, working 12-16 hours a day (for example, the famous physicist Edison believed that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% "sweating").
Decisiveness is the ability of a person to quickly and thoughtfully choose a goal and determine how to achieve it. A decisive person is able at the right time to cast aside all hesitations and doubts and firmly stop at a specific goal or choose a means of realizing it.
Persistence. This volitional property of the individual is manifested in the ability to direct and control behavior for a long time in accordance with the intended goal. A persistent person does not stop at failures, does not succumb to the feeling of doubt, reproaches, but again and again mobilizes his physical and mental strength to achieve the goal.
Endurance (or self-control) is understood as a volitional property of a person, which is reflected in the ability to restrain physical and mental manifestations (actions, emotions) that interfere with the achievement of a goal. Endurance is especially necessary in difficult, extreme conditions that threaten the health and life of a person, his honor, dignity, etc.
Independence is a volitional property of the individual, expressed in the ability to set goals on their own initiative, to find means to achieve them. An independent person does not wait for instructions from other people, does not rely on a hint, but makes decisions himself and implements them in practice.
The next element of the socio-psychological structure, which plays a stimulating role in the activity of the individual, are emotions and feelings. Feelings are complex, stable personality traits that manifest themselves under the influence of any influences. Personal experiences that reflect certain influences are emotions. Emotions are mental processes on the basis of which feelings are formed as personality traits.
In psychology, the following feelings of a person are distinguished: moral (moral), intellectual (cognitive), aesthetic.
The moral sense is called the emotional; the attitude of the individual to the behavior of people and his own. Such feelings arise and develop in the process of joint activities of people and reflect the moral norms adopted in society, in a particular team. These experiences are the result of an assessment of actions, their compliance or non-compliance with moral standards, which a person considers obligatory for himself and others. Moral feelings include feelings of sympathy and antipathy, respect and contempt, gratitude and ingratitude, love and hatred. The highest moral feelings, determined by the worldview of the individual (system of views and beliefs), are Intellectual feelings are experiences that arise in the process of mental activity. The main intellectual (cognitive) feelings include: curiosity, joy and admiration, pride in connection with the solution of a problem, doubt and disappointment in case of failure, inspiration, etc. Development in a person is especially important (primarily in the transition of the economy to market relations, a sense of a new as a motive for finding new methods and methods of work, the struggle for the introduction of innovations (innovations) and practices, the formation of market thinking.Intellectual feelings are very closely related to moral feelings.Thus, the desire to know the truth is determined not only by intellectual feeling, but also dictated by the moral duty of a person.
Aesthetic feelings arise and develop when a person perceives and creates beauty. Perceiving the beautiful (for example, masterpieces of art), a person experiences an aesthetic sense of beauty, which causes a desire to admire it, encourages more and more new meetings with it.
The systemic qualities of a personality include the whole set of characteristics that reflect its sociality, belonging to humanity. These qualities include such generalized characteristics as worldview, beliefs, patriotism, civic responsibility, etc.
The social behavior of an individual is largely related to its role. The concept of "role" in social psychology means the social function of the individual, a way of behavior that corresponds to accepted standards, depending on its status (positions) in the system of interpersonal relations. This understanding is due to the fact that in similar circumstances (for example, at the same enterprise), employees, occupying the same positions, behave in the same way in the labor process in accordance with the requirements of production, i.e. their labor behavior is regulated by relevant documents (regulations, job descriptions, etc.). In other words, a role is a stable pattern of behavior reproduced by people who have the same status (position) in the social system. The role reflects, therefore, the socially typical aspects of behavior.
Based on the above definition, the social role performs two functions:
1) tells a person how to behave in this position (student, customer in a store, passenger on a bus, son in a family, etc.);
2) forms certain expectations of the partner from the behavior of its performer, which, in turn, determine the response behavior of the partner. The functional role of each member of the labor collective is determined; job descriptions (seller, foreman, etc.) which reflect the duties, rights, responsibilities of the employee, his official relationship with other members of the team, as well as the basic requirements for his professional qualities. A detailed and clear job description is the basis for an adequate understanding) and assimilation of the functional role. However, as the results of sociological studies show, detailed regulation of the functional activity of an employee is not always justified; the instruction should establish a certain degree of independence of the worker, the opportunity for the manifestation of initiative and creativity.
The foregoing allows us to reveal the structure (internal structure) of the social role. It includes the following elements:
1) role prescriptions (social and group norms of behavior, requirements of a particular profession, position, etc.);
2) role expectations;
3) role behavior (i.e. role performance);
4) assessment of role behavior;
5) sanctions (in case of failure to perform the role). The central element of the structure, which allows you to explain why the same role, for example, a line manager (manager) in an enterprise, different people perform differently, is the concept of "role behavior".
The above features of the social behavior of the individual are clearly manifested in groups.
A group is a real-life formation in which people are brought together, united by some common feature, a type of joint activity, or placed in some identical conditions, circumstances, in a certain way they are aware of their belonging to this formation.
The elementary parameters of any group include: the composition of the group (or its composition), the structure of the group, group processes, group norms and values, the system of sanctions. Each of these parameters can acquire completely different meanings depending on the type of group being studied. For example, the composition of a group can be described differently depending on whether, for example, the age, professional or social characteristics of the group members are significant in each particular case. A single recipe for describing the composition of a group cannot be given due to the diversity of real groups; in each specific case, one must start with which real group is chosen as the object of study: a school class, a sports team or a production team. In other words, we immediately set a certain set of parameters to characterize the composition of the group, depending on the type of activity with which this group is associated. Naturally, the characteristics of large and small social groups differ especially strongly, and they must be studied separately.
The same can be said about the structure of the group. There are several rather formal features of the group structure, which, however, are mainly revealed in the study of small groups: the structure of preferences, the structure of "power", the structure of communications.
However, if we consistently consider the group as a subject of activity, then its structure must be approached accordingly. Apparently, in this case, the most important thing is the analysis of the structure of group activity, which includes a description of the functions of each member of the group in this joint activity. At the same time, a very significant characteristic is the emotional structure of the group - the structure of interpersonal relations, as well as its connection with the functional structure of group activity. In social psychology, the relationship between these two structures is often seen as the relationship between "informal" and "formal" relationships.
An important component of characterizing the position of an individual in a group is the system of "group expectations". This term denotes the simple fact that each member of the group not only performs its functions in it, but is also necessarily perceived, evaluated by others. In particular, this refers to the fact that each position, as well as each role, is expected to perform certain functions, and not only a simple list of them, but also the quality of the performance of these functions. The group, through a system of expected patterns of behavior corresponding to each role, in a certain way controls the activities of its members. In some cases, there may be a discrepancy between the expectations that the group has regarding any of its members, and his real behavior, the real way he performs his role. In order for this system of expectations to be somehow defined, there are two more extremely important formations in the group: group norms and group sanctions.
All group norms are social norms; are "establishments, models, standards of proper, from the point of view of society as a whole and social groups and their members. behavior."
In a narrower sense, group norms are certain rules that are developed by the group, adopted by it, and to which the behavior of its members must obey in order for their joint activities to be possible. Norms perform, thus, a regulatory function in relation to this activity. Group norms are associated with values, since any rules can be formulated only on the basis of acceptance or rejection of some socially significant phenomena. The values of each group are formed on the basis of the development of a certain attitude to social phenomena, dictated by the place of this group in the system of social relations, its experience in organizing certain activities.
Although the problem of values is studied in its entirety in sociology, it is extremely important for social psychology to be guided by certain facts established in sociology. The most important of them is the different significance of different kinds of Nastya prices for group life, their different correlation with the values of society. When it comes to relatively general and abstract concepts, such as good, evil, happiness, etc., then we can say that at this level the values are common to all social groups and that they can be considered as the values of society. However, in the transition to the assessment of more specific social phenomena, such as labor, education, culture, for example, groups begin to differ in the accepted assessments. The values of different social groups may not coincide with each other, and in this case it is difficult to talk about the values of society. The specificity of the attitude towards each and such values is determined by the place of the social group in the system of social relations. Norms as rules governing the behavior and activities of group members, of course, are based precisely on group values, although the rules of everyday behavior may not carry any special group specifics. Group norms thus include both generally valid norms and specific, developed by this particular group. All of them, taken together, act as an important factor in the regulation of social behavior, ensuring the ordering of the position of various groups in the social structure of society. The specificity of the analysis can be ensured only when the ratio of these two types of norms in the life of each group, and in a particular type of society, is revealed.
A formal approach to the analysis of group norms, when experimental studies reveal only the mechanism of acceptance or rejection by an individual of group norms, but not their content, determined by the specifics of activity, is clearly insufficient. Understanding the relationship of the individual with the group is possible only if it is revealed which norms of the group accepts and rejects, and why he does so. All this is of particular importance when there is a discrepancy between the norms and values of the group and society, when the group begins to focus on values that do not coincide with the norms of society.
An important problem is the measure of the acceptance of norms by each member of the group: how the individual accepts group norms, how much each of them deviates from the observance of these norms, how social and "personal" norms correlate. One of the functions of social (including group) norms lies precisely in the fact that, through them, the demands of society "are addressed and presented to a person as an individual and a member of a particular group, community, society." At the same time, it is necessary to analyze sanctions - the mechanisms by which the group "returns" its member to the path of compliance with the norms. Sanctions can be of two types: encouraging and prohibitive, positive and negative. The system of sanctions is not designed to compensate for non-compliance, but to enforce compliance. The study of sanctions makes sense only if specific groups are analyzed, since the content of the sanctions is correlated with the content of the norms, and the latter are determined by the properties of the group.
Thus, the considered set of concepts, with the help of which the socio-psychological description of the group is carried out, is only a certain conceptual network, which has yet to be filled with content.
Such a grid is useful and necessary, but the problem is to clearly understand its functions, not to reduce it to a simple statement, a kind of "adjustment" to this grid of real processes occurring in groups. In order to take the next step along the path of analysis, it is now necessary to classify the groups that are the subject of consideration within the framework of social psychology.
First of all, for social psychology, the division of groups into conditional and real ones is significant. She focuses her research on real groups. But among these real ones there are also those that mainly appear in general psychological research - real laboratory groups. In contrast to them, there are real natural groups. Socio-psychological analysis is possible with respect to both varieties of real groups, but the real natural groups identified in sociological analysis are of the greatest importance. In turn, these natural groups are subdivided into the so-called "large" and "small" groups. Small groups are a habitable field of social psychology. As for large groups, the question of their study is much more complicated and requires special consideration. It is important to emphasize that these large groups are also unequally represented in social psychology: some of them have a solid tradition of research (these are mainly large, unorganized, spontaneously emerged troupes, the term "group" itself is very arbitrary in relation to them), while others are organized , long-existing groups - like classes, nations, are much less represented in social psychology as an object of study. The whole point of the foregoing discussions about the subject of social psychology requires the inclusion of these groups in the scope of analysis. In the same way, small groups can be divided into two varieties: emerging troupes, already set by external social requirements, but not yet united by joint activity in the full sense of the word, and groups of a higher level of development, already established. This classification can be visualized in the following diagram. Everything from the heading "real natural groups" is the object of study of social psychology. All further presentation will be carried out according to this scheme. The general laws of communication and interaction of people analyzed above must now be considered in the context of those real groups where these laws acquire their own special content.
Hence the content of the second node: what exactly does social psychology investigate in the field of intergroup relations? The fundamental difference between the socio-psychological angle of view on the problem lies in the fact that here the focus (unlike sociology) is not on intergroup processes and phenomena in themselves or their determination by social relations, but on the internal reflection of these processes, i.e. cognitive sphere associated with various aspects of intergroup interaction. Socio-psychological analysis focuses on the problem of relations that arise in the course of interaction between groups, as an internal, psychological category. However, in contrast to the cognitivist orientation, such an understanding presupposes not only the closest connection between the subjective reflection of intergroup relations and the actual activities of the studied groups, but also its determination of all cognitive processes that accompany these relations. Just as in the interpretation of the group itself, here causal relationships, the conditionality of the cognitive sphere by the parameters of joint group activity, are the main direction of study of the entire field. In this case, reasoning by analogy is appropriate: groups exist objectively, and for social psychology it is important under what conditions the group turns into a psychological reality for the individual; in the same way, intergroup relations exist objectively (their study from this point of view is a matter for sociology), and it is important for social psychology how this fact is reflected in the minds of group members and predetermines their perception of each other.
The nature of intergroup perception lies in the fact that here we are dealing with the ordering of individual cognitive structures, linking them into a single whole; it is not a simple sum of the perception of a foreign group by individuals belonging to the subject of perception, but precisely a completely new quality, a group formation. It has two characteristics: for the group-subject of perception, it is "integrity", which is defined as the degree of coincidence of the ideas of the members of this group about another group ("everyone" and so-and-so or "not all" think about the other group so-and-so). With regard to the group-object of perception, this is "uniformity", which shows the degree of distribution of ideas about another group to its individual members ("everyone" in another group is like that or "not all"). Integrity and uniformity are specific structural characteristics of intergroup perception. Its dynamic characteristics also differ from the dynamic characteristics of interpersonal perception: intergroup social-perceptual processes are more stable, conservative, rigid, since their subject is not one person, but a group, and the formation of such processes is not only a longer, but also a more complex process, which includes both the individual life experience of each member of the group, and the experience of the "life" of the group. The range of possible aspects from the point of view of which another group is perceived is much narrower than what occurs in the case of interpersonal perception: the image of another group is formed directly depending on situations of joint intergroup activity.
This joint intergroup activity is not limited to direct interaction (as was the case in Sheriff's experiments). Intergroup relations and, in particular, notions of "other groups" can also arise in the absence of direct interaction between groups, as, for example, in the case of relations between large groups. Here, a broader system of social conditions, the socio-historical activity of these groups, acts as a mediating factor. Thus, intergroup activity can act both in the form of direct interaction between different groups, and in its extremely indirect impersonal forms, for example, through the exchange of values of culture, folklore, etc. There are a lot of examples of such relations in the field of international life, when the image of the “other” (another country, another people) is formed not necessarily in the course of direct interaction, but on the basis of impressions gleaned from fiction, the media, etc. P. Both the very nature of intergroup perception and its dependence on the nature of culture determine the particularly important role of stereotypes in this process. The perception of a foreign group through a stereotype is a widespread phenomenon. It is necessary to distinguish two sides in it: a stereotype helps to quickly and fairly reliably categorize the perceived group, i.e. classify it in a broader category. In this capacity, the stereotype is necessary and useful, since it provides relatively quick and schematic knowledge. However, as soon as the stereotype of another group is filled with negative characteristics ("they are all such and such"). it begins to contribute to the formation of intergroup hostility, as there is a polarization of value judgments. As already noted, this regularity is especially severe in interethnic relations.
The socio-psychological structure of the team ends with the nomination of leaders in small groups and in the team as a whole. Leadership is a natural socio-psychological process in a group, built on the influence of a person's personal authority on the behavior of group members. 3. Freud understood leadership as a dual psychological process: on the one hand, group, on the other - individual. These processes are based on the ability of leaders to attract people to themselves, unconsciously evoke a feeling of admiration, adoration, love. The worship of people of the same person can make that person a leader. Psychoanalysts have identified ten types of leadership
1. "Sovereign", or "patriarchal overlord". A leader in the form of a strict but beloved father, he is able to suppress or displace negative emotions and inspire people with self-confidence. He is nominated on the basis of love and revered.
2. "Leader". In it, people see the expression, the concentration of their desires, corresponding to a certain group standard. The personality of the leader is the bearer of these standards. They try to imitate him in the group.
3. "Tyrant". He becomes a leader because he inspires others with a sense of obedience and unaccountable fear, he is considered the strongest. A tyrant leader is a dominant, authoritarian personality and is usually feared and obeyed.
4. "Organizer". It acts for group members as a force to maintain the "I-concept" and satisfy the needs of everyone, relieves feelings of guilt and anxiety. Such a leader unites people, he is respected.
5. "Seducer". A person becomes a leader by playing on the weaknesses of others. It acts as a "magical force", giving vent to the repressed emotions of other people, prevents conflicts, and relieves tension. Such a leader is adored and often overlooked for all his shortcomings.
6. "Hero". Sacrifice himself for others; this type manifests itself especially in situations of group protest - thanks to his courage, others are guided by him, they see in him the standard of justice. A heroic leader draws people along.
7. "Bad example." Acts as a source of contagiousness for a conflict-free personality, emotionally infects others.
8. "Idol". It attracts, attracts, positively infects the environment, it is loved, idolized and idealized.
9. "Outcast".
10. Scapegoat.
There is a distinction between "formal" leadership, where influence comes from an official position in an organization, and "informal" leadership, where influence comes from others recognizing the leader's personal superiority. In most situations, of course, these two kinds of influence are intertwined to a greater or lesser extent.
The officially appointed head of the unit has the advantage of winning leadership positions in the group, and therefore, more often than anyone else, becomes the recognized leader. However, his status in the organization and the fact that he is appointed "from outside" puts him in a position somewhat different from that of informal natural leaders. First of all, the desire to move up the corporate ladder prompts him to identify himself with larger divisions of the organization than with a group of his subordinates. He may believe that emotional attachment to any working group should not serve as a brake on this path, and therefore identifying himself with the leadership of the organization is a source of satisfaction for his personal ambitions. But if he knows that he will not rise above, and does not particularly strive for this, often such a leader strongly identifies himself with his subordinates and does everything in his power to protect their interests.
Formal leaders first of all determine how, in what ways it is necessary to achieve the goal set, as a rule, by other people, organize and direct the work of subordinates in accordance with detailed plans, while taking a passive position. They build their interaction with others on the basis of a clear regulation of rights and obligations, try not to go beyond them, seeing themselves and other members of one organization, in which a certain order and discipline should prevail.
In contrast, informal leaders determine what goals to strive for, formulating them on their own, without going into unnecessary details. Their followers are those who share their views and are ready to follow them, despite the difficulties, and the leaders at the same time find themselves in the role of inspirers, as opposed to managers, who ensure the achievement of goals through reward or punishment. Unlike formal leaders, informal leaders are not controlled by others, but build relationships with followers on trust in them.
To summarize what has been said, we will use the table, which is based on the materials of O. Vikhansky and A. Naumov.
In a team whose general level is below average, the informal leader most often acts as an expert on any issues or an emotional center, can cheer, sympathize, help. In a team with a high level of development, he is primarily an intellectual center, a source of ideas, a consultant on the most difficult problems. And in both cases, he is the integrator of the collective, the initiator and organizer of its active actions, the model against which the rest compare their thoughts and actions.
Since the informal leader reflects the interests of the team, he is a kind of controller, making sure that the specific actions of each of its members do not contradict the common interests, do not undermine the unity of the group. In necessary cases, he can enter into conflict with the administration in connection with this, authorizing, even in the sphere of production activity, only those decisions that do not contradict the interests of the team he represents. It is practically impossible to fight this phenomenon, because pressure on the leader only causes even greater unity of the team and its opposition to the administration.
It is believed that in a conflict situation, if there is an opportunity with an informal leader, it is better to compromise by offering him at the same time an official position, which he usually does not have, but quite deserves.
The easiest way to do this is when the boundaries of the formal and informal team headed by such a leader coincide, and its members are guided by corporate values. Under these conditions, it will be much easier for a leader who has received official authority to manage the team, and to a certain extent he will be able to neglect the interests of the team for the sake of the interests of the official organization, to which people, trusting him, will agree. However, at the same time, official decisions still have to be adjusted taking into account the interests of the collective, because it is dangerous to abuse its trust.
The study of leadership has been undertaken on a large scale and in a systematic manner since the early 1930s. Then the goal was to identify those personal characteristics of people that make them leaders. They turned out to be the following qualities: the level of knowledge and intelligence, impressive appearance, common sense, a high degree of self-confidence, honesty, etc. most of the above requirements.
Page 2
in psychology, a systemic social quality is designated, acquired by an individual in objective activity and communication and characterizing the level and quality of representation of social relations in an individual.
A.V. Petrovsky in his developments proceeds from the fact that the concepts of "individual" and "personality" are not identical. Personality is a special quality that is acquired by an individual in society in the process of entering into public relations by nature. To understand the foundations on which certain personality traits are formed, it is necessary to consider the life of a person in society. The inclusion of an individual in the system of social relations determines the content and nature of the activities performed by him, the range and methods of communication with other people, i.e., the features of his social life, lifestyle. But the way of life of individual individuals, certain communities of people, as well as society as a whole, is determined by the historically developing system of social relations. And this means that a person can be understood or studied only in the context of specific social conditions, a specific historical era. Moreover, it should be noted that for an individual, society is not just an external environment. The personality is constantly included in the system of social relations, which is mediated by many factors.
Petrovsky believes that the personality of a particular person can continue in other people, and with the death of an individual, it does not completely die. And in the words "he lives in us even after death" there is neither mysticism nor pure metaphor, it is a statement of the fact of the ideal representation of the individual after his material disappearance.
Considering further the point of view of the representatives of the Moscow psychological school on the problem of personality, it should be noted that in most cases the authors include in the concept of personality certain properties that belong to the individual, and they also mean those properties that determine the originality of the individual, his individuality. However, the concepts of "individual", "personality" and "individuality" are not identical in content - each of them reveals a specific aspect of the individual being of a person. Personality can only be understood in a system of stable interpersonal relationships mediated by the content, values, and meaning of the joint activity of each of the participants. These interpersonal connections are real, but supersensible in nature. They are manifested in specific individual properties and actions of people who are part of the team, but are not reduced to them.
Just as the concepts of "individual" and "personality" are not identical, personality and individuality, in turn, form a unity, but not an identity.
If personality traits are not represented in the system of interpersonal relations, they turn out to be insignificant for assessing the personality and do not receive conditions for development, just as only individual traits that are most "drawn" into the leading activity for a given social community act as personal traits. Therefore, according to representatives of the Moscow psychological school, individuality is only one of the aspects of a person's personality.
Thus, two main points can be traced in the position of representatives of the Moscow psychological school. First, the personality and its characteristics are compared with the level of social manifestation of the qualities and properties of a person. Secondly, the personality is considered as a social product, not connected in any way with biological determinants, and, therefore, it can be concluded that the social influences the mental development of the individual to a greater extent.
Leisure and personal characteristics of a person
Leisure is an integral part of a person's living space, which is diverse in the forms of its manifestation and the motives realized in it. We believe that a person's personality traits influence the choice of certain...
Features of the development of moral self-awareness in adolescence
Morality is “moral norms of behavior, relationships with people, as well as morality itself”. In general, in most teachings, morality is identified with morality. In foreign psychology of morality, the question of the existence of "moral...
Psychology as an academic discipline. psychological knowledge in people's lives
Education was one of the first areas where psychological knowledge began to be consciously and purposefully applied. It is no coincidence that therefore psychology as an academic discipline has long become mandatory in the training of educa...
Topic 2.7. Personality and its socialization.
Plan
1. The concept of personality. Basic theories of personality.
2. The structure of personality. Self-consciousness of the individual. Personality formation.
3. Socialization and its main characteristics.
4. The concept of social behavior. Prosocial and antisocial behavior. Aggression and regulation of social behavior
1. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya K.A. Activity and personality psychology. –– M.: Nauka, 1980.–– S. 113-185, 210-259.
2. Averin V.A. Psychology of Personality: Textbook. - St. Petersburg: Publishing House of Mikhailov V.A., 1999. - 89 p.
3. Asmolov A.G. Psychology of Personality: Principles of General Psychological Analysis: Textbook. –– M.: MSU Publishing House, 1990. –– S. 7-363.
4. Bodalev A.A. Personality and Communication: Selected Psychological Works. –– 2nd ed., revised. –– M.: International Pedagogical Academy, 1995 – S. 5-20.
5. Bodalev A.A. Psychology about personality. –– M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1988. –– S. 5-11, 37-59.
6. Bozhovich L.I. Personality and its formation in childhood. –– M.: Enlightenment, 1982. –– S. 39-123.
7. Zeigarnik B.V. Personality theory in foreign psychology. –– M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1982.–– S. 6-97.
8. Leontiev A.N. Activity. Consciousness. Personality. –– M.: Nauka, 1982. –– S. 86-135.
9. Merlin V.S. The structure of personality. Character, abilities, self-awareness. Textbook for the special course. - Perm: University Publishing House, 1990. - P. 81-108.
10. Orlov A.B. Personality and essence: external and internal "I" of a person. //Questions of psychology. –– 1995. –– No. 2. –– C. 5 - 19.
11. Psychology of individual differences. Texts.–– M: Pedagogy, 1982.–– S. 179-218.
12. Psychology of personality. Texts. –– M: Pedagogy, 1982.–– S. 11-19, 39-41.
13. Psychology of a developing personality / Ed. A.V. Petrovsky. –– M.: Pedagogy, 1987.–– S. 10-105.
The concept of personality. Basic theories of personality.
A person as a subject of social relations, a carrier of socially significant qualities is personality.
Personality is a systemic social quality of an individual, which is formed in joint activities and communication.
Along with the concept of personality, we also use such terms as person, individual and individuality. All these concepts have specifics, but they are interconnected:
Man is the most general, integrative concept. It means a creature that embodies the highest degree of development of life, a product of social and labor processes, an indissoluble unity of the natural and the social. But, bearing in itself a social and generic essence, each person is a single natural being, an individual;
An individual is a specific person as a representative of the genus Homo sapiens, the bearer of the prerequisites (inclinations) of human development;
Individuality is the unique originality of a particular person, his natural and socially acquired properties.
In the concept of personality, a system of socially significant qualities of a person comes to the fore.
The personality has a multi-level organization. The highest and leading level of the psychological organization of the personality - its need-motivational sphere - is - orientation personalities, her attitude to society, to individuals, to herself and her social duties.
A person is not born with ready-made abilities, character, etc. These properties are formed during life, but on a certain natural basis. The hereditary basis of the human body (genotype) determines its anatomical and physiological features, the main qualities of the nervous system, and the dynamics of nervous processes. The natural, biological organization of man contains the possibilities of his mental development.
A human being becomes a human only through mastering the experience of previous generations, enshrined in knowledge, traditions, objects of material and spiritual culture.
In the formation of an individual as a personality, processes are essential personal identification (the formation of an individual's identification with other people and human society as a whole) and personalization (realization by the individual of the need for a certain representation of his personality in the life of other people, personal self-realization in a given social community).
The person interacts with other people on the basis of " I-concepts ", personal reflection - their ideas about themselves, their capabilities, their significance.
A person is born with certain hereditary inclinations. Most of them are ambiguous: on their basis, various personality traits can be formed. In this case, the process of education plays a decisive role.
However, the possibilities of education are also connected with the hereditary characteristics of the individual. hereditary basis The human body determines its anatomical and physiological features, the main qualities of the nervous system, the dynamics of nervous processes. The biological organization of man, his nature, contains the possibilities of his future mental development.
Modern scientific data indicate that certain biological factors can act as conditions that make it difficult or easier to form certain mental qualities of a person.
In the second floor. In the 20th century, many approaches and theories of personality have developed.
Structural theories of personality aimed at identifying the structure of the personality, its typology, constituent elements, personality traits. The largest representatives of the structural theories of personality are G. Allport, K. Rogers, D. Cattell, G. Eysenck.
Gordon Willard Allport(1897 - 1967), an American psychologist, one of the founders of the modern systematic approach to the study of personality psychology, believed that any personality has a stable set of features. (His theory is called "the theory of personality traits".) Allport explored the hierarchy of personality's value orientations and typologized personality on this basis ("Personality: Psychological Interpretation", 1938).
Another American psychologist Carl Ransome Rogers (1902 - 1987), one of the leaders of the so-called humanistic psychology, believed that the core of the personality is its self-concept. Being formed in the social environment, it is the main integrative mechanism of self-regulation of the individual. The self-concept is constantly compared with the ideal self, causing attempts to protect the self-concept from disintegration: the individual constantly strives to self-justify his behavior, uses a variety of psychological defense mechanisms (up to perceptual distortions - distortions of perception, and ignoring objectionable objects). Rogers developed a special (interactive) system of psychotherapy based on a trusting relationship with the patient ("Client-Centered Therapy", 1954).
In the XX century in the study of personality psychology begins the widespread use of experimental mathematical methods. American psychologist James McKean Cattell (1860 - 1944) pioneered the testological movement in psychology. He was the first to use in the psychological study of personality a complex method of modern statistics - factor analysis, which minimizes many different indicators and personality assessments and allows you to identify 16 basic personality traits (16-factor Cattell Personality Questionnaire).
The Cattell questionnaire reveals such basic personality traits as reasonableness, secrecy, emotional stability, dominance, seriousness (frivolity), conscientiousness, caution, sensitivity, gullibility (suspiciousness), conservatism, conformity, controllability, tension.
There are more than 100 questions in the Cattell questionnaire, the answers to which (affirmative or negative) are grouped in accordance with the "key" - a certain way of processing the results, after which the severity of a particular factor is determined.
Methods for mathematical analysis of the results of observations and surveys, documentary data were also developed G. Eysenkom . His concept of personality traits is related to its two interrelated basic qualities: 1) extraversion-introversion; 2) stability-instability (neuroticism, anxiety).
cognitive psychology
The disadvantage of structural personality theories was that it is impossible to predict human behavior on the basis of knowledge of personality traits, because. it also depends on the situation.
As an alternative to this theory, arose theory of social learning. The main psychological characteristic of a person in this theory is an act, or a series of acts. Influence on human behavior is provided by other people, support or condemnation of actions on their part. A person acts one way or another, based on his life experience, which is acquired as a result of interaction with other people. Forms of behavior are acquired by imitation (vicarial learning). A person's behavior and his personal characteristics depend on the frequency of occurrence of the same "stimulus situations" and on the assessments of behavior in these situations received from other people.
One of the main directions of modern foreign psychology is cognitive psychology(from Latin cognitio - knowledge), which, in contrast to behaviorism, postulates knowledge as the basis of behavior. Within the framework of cognitive psychology, the laws of cognitive activity (J. Bruner), the psychology of individual differences (M. Eysenck), and the psychology of personality (J. Kelly) are studied. In connection with the development of cybernetics and the actualization of the problem of managing complex systems, there is an increased interest in the structure of the human.
Proponents of personality psychology also offered their own approach to personality psychology humanistic psychology(Maslow, Rogers). The main attention of representatives of this direction was drawn to the description of the inner world of the individual. The basic human need, according to this theory, is self-actualization, the desire for self-improvement and self-expression.
A person who has come out of the animal world through labor and develops in society, carries out joint activities with other people and communicates with them, becomes a person, the subject of knowledge and active transformation of the material world, society and himself.
Man is already born as a man. This statement only at first glance seems to be a truth that does not require proof. The fact is that in the human embryo, the genes contain natural prerequisites for the development of proper human traits and qualities. The configuration of the body of a newborn implies the possibility of bipedal locomotion, the structure of the brain provides the possibility of developing intelligence, the structure of the hand - the prospect of using tools, etc., and in this way the infant - already a man in the sum of his capabilities - differs from the cub of an animal. Thus, the fact of the infant's belonging to the human race is proved, which is fixed in the concept of an individual (in contrast to the cub of an animal, which immediately after birth and until the end of its life is called an individual). The concept of "individual" embodies the generic affiliation of a person. An individual can be considered a newborn, and an adult at the stage of savagery, and a highly educated inhabitant of a civilized country.
Therefore, when we say of a particular person that he is an individual, we are essentially saying that he is potentially a person. Being born as an individual, a person gradually acquires a special social quality, becomes a personality. Even in childhood, the individual is included in the historically established system of social relations, which he finds already ready. The further development of a person in society creates such an interweaving of relationships that forms him as a person, i.e. as a real person, not only not like others, but also not like them, acting, thinking, suffering, included in social ties as a member of society, an accomplice in the historical process.
Personality in psychology denotes a systemic (social) quality acquired by an individual in objective activity and communication and characterizing the degree of representation of social relations in an individual.
So, a personality can be understood only in a system of stable interpersonal relationships, which are mediated by the content, values, and meaning of joint activities for each of the participants. These interpersonal connections are manifested in specific individual properties and actions of people, forming a special quality of the group activity itself.
The personality of each person is endowed only with its inherent combination of psychological traits and characteristics that form its individuality, constituting the originality of a person, his difference from other people. Individuality is manifested in the traits of temperament, character, habits, prevailing interests, in the qualities of cognitive processes (perception, memory, thinking, imagination), in abilities, individual style of activity, etc. There are no two identical people with the same combination of these psychological characteristics - a person's personality is unique in its individuality.
Just as the concepts "individual" and "personality" are not identical, personality and individuality, in turn, form a unity, but not an identity. The ability to add and multiply large numbers very quickly “in the mind”, thoughtfulness, the habit of biting nails and other features of a person act as features of his personality, but do not necessarily enter into the characterization of his personality, if only because they may not be represented in forms. activities and communication that are essential to the group in which the individual possessing these traits is included. If personality traits are not represented in the system of interpersonal relations, then they turn out to be insignificant for characterizing the individual's personality and do not receive conditions for development. The individual features of a person remain “silent” until a certain time, until they become necessary in the system of interpersonal relations, the subject of which will be this person as a person.
The problem of the correlation of biological (natural) and social principles in the structure of a person's personality is one of the most complex and debatable in modern psychology. A prominent place is occupied by theories that single out two main substructures in a person's personality, formed under the influence of two factors - biological and social. The idea was put forward that the whole personality of a person breaks up into an “endopsychic” and “exopsychic” organization. "Endopsyche" as a substructure of personality expresses the internal mechanism of the human personality, identified with the neuropsychic organization of man. "Exopsychic" is determined by the attitude of a person to the external environment. “Endopsychia” includes such traits as susceptibility, features of memory, thinking and imagination, the ability to volitional effort, impulsiveness, etc., and “exopsychia” - a system of human relations and his experience, i.e. interests, inclinations, ideals, prevailing feelings, formed knowledge, etc.
How should one treat this concept of two factors? Natural organic sides and features exist in the structure of the individuality of the human personality as its socially conditioned elements. Natural (anatomical, physiological and other qualities) and social form a unity and cannot be mechanically opposed to each other as independent substructures of personality. So, recognizing the role of the natural, biological, and social in the structure of individuality, it is impossible to single out biological substructures in a person's personality, in which they already exist in a transformed form.
Returning to the question of understanding the essence of personality, it is necessary to dwell on the structure of personality when it is considered as a “supersensory” systemic quality of an individual. Considering the personality in the system of subjective relations, there are three types of subsystems of the individual's personal existence (or three aspects of the interpretation of the personality). The first aspect of consideration is the intra-individual subsystem: personality is interpreted as a property inherent in the subject himself; the personal turns out to be immersed in the inner space of the individual's being. The second aspect is the interindividual personal subsystem, when the “space of interindividual connections” becomes the sphere of its definition and existence. The third aspect of consideration is the meta-individual personal subsystem. Here attention is drawn to the impact that, voluntarily or unwittingly, the individual has on other people. Personality is already perceived from a new angle: its most important characteristics, which were tried to be seen in the qualities of the individual, are proposed to be sought not only in himself, but also in other people. Continuing in other people, with the death of the individual, the personality does not completely die. The individual as a carrier of personality passes away, but, personalized in other people, continues to live. There is neither mysticism nor pure metaphor in the words “he lives in us even after death”, this is a statement of the fact of the ideal representation of the individual
after his material disappearance.
Of course, a personality can be characterized only in the unity of all three proposed aspects of consideration: its individuality, representation in the system of interpersonal relations, and, finally, in other people.
If, when deciding why a person becomes more active, we analyze the essence of needs, in which the state of need for something or someone is expressed, leading to activity, then in order to determine what activity will result in, it is necessary to analyze what determines its direction, where and what this activity is focused on.
The totality of stable motives that guide the activity of the individual and are relatively independent of the current situations is called the orientation of the person's personality. The main role of personality orientation belongs to conscious motives.
Interest is a motive that promotes orientation in any area, familiarization with new facts, a more complete and deeper reflection of reality. Subjectively - for the individual - interest is found in a positive emotional tone, which acquires the process of cognition, in the desire to get to know the object more deeply, to learn more about it, to understand it.
Thus, interests act as a constant incentive mechanism for cognition.
Interests are an important aspect of the motivation of a person's activity, but not the only one. Beliefs are an essential motive for behavior.
Beliefs are a system of motives of a person that encourages him to act in accordance with his views, principles, worldview. The content of needs, acting in the form of beliefs, is knowledge about the surrounding world of nature and society, their certain understanding. When this knowledge forms an ordered and internally organized system of views (philosophical, aesthetic, ethical, natural sciences, etc.), they can be considered as a worldview.
The presence of beliefs covering a wide range of issues in the field of literature, art, social life, production activity indicates a high level of activity of a person's personality.
Interacting and communicating with people, a person distinguishes himself from the environment, feels himself the subject of his physical and mental states, actions and processes, acts for himself as an “I” that opposes “others” and at the same time is inextricably linked with it.
The experience of having a "I" is the result of a long process of personality development that begins in infancy and which is referred to as "discovery of the "I". A one-year-old child begins to realize the differences between the sensations of his own body and those sensations that are caused by objects outside. Then, at the age of 2-3 years, the child separates the process that gives him pleasure and the result of his own actions with objects from the objective actions of adults, making demands to the latter: “I myself!” For the first time, he begins to realize himself as the subject of his own actions and deeds (a personal pronoun appears in the child’s speech), not only distinguishing himself from the environment, but also opposing himself to everyone else (“This is mine, this is not yours!”).
It is known that in adolescence and youth, the desire for self-perception increases, for awareness of one's place in life and oneself as a subject of relations with others. This is associated with the development of self-awareness. Senior students form an image of their own "I". The image of the “I” is a relatively stable, not always conscious, experienced as a unique system of ideas of the individual about himself, on the basis of which he builds his interaction with others. The image of "I" thus fits into the structure of personality. It acts as a setting in relation to itself. Like any attitude, the image of the “I” includes three components.
First, the cognitive component: an idea of one's abilities, appearance, social significance, etc.
Secondly, the emotional-evaluative component: self-respect, self-criticism, selfishness, self-abasement, etc.
Thirdly, behavioral (volitional): the desire to be understood, win sympathy, improve one's status, or the desire to remain unnoticed, evade assessment and criticism, hide one's shortcomings, etc.
The image of the “I” is a stable, not always conscious, experienced as a unique system of ideas of the individual about himself, on the basis of which he builds his interaction with others.
The image of "I" and the premise and consequence of social interaction. In fact, psychologists fix in a person not one image of his “I”, but a multitude of “I-images” replacing each other, alternately coming to the forefront of self-consciousness, then losing their significance in a given situation of social interaction. “I-image” is not a static, but a dynamic formation of an individual's personality.
The “I-image” can be experienced as a representation of oneself at the moment of the experience itself, usually referred to in psychology as the “real I”, but it would probably be more correct to call it the momentary or “current I” of the subject.
The “I-image” is at the same time the “ideal I” of the subject - what he should, in his opinion, become in order to meet the internal criteria for success.
Let us point out another variant of the emergence of the “I-image” - “fantastic I” - what the subject would like to become if it turned out to be possible for him, how he would like to see himself. The construction of one's fantastic "I" is characteristic not only of young men, but also of adults. When evaluating the motivating significance of this “I-image”, it is important to know whether the individual’s objective understanding of his position and place in life turned out to be replaced by his “fantastic I”. The predominance of fantastic ideas about oneself in the personality structure, not accompanied by actions that would contribute to the realization of the desired, disorganizes the activity and self-consciousness of a person and, in the end, can severely injure him due to the obvious discrepancy between the desired and the actual.
The degree of adequacy of the "I-image" is found out when studying one of its most important aspects - self-esteem of the individual.
Self-esteem is an assessment by a person of himself, his capabilities, qualities and place among other people. This is the most essential and most studied side of the self-consciousness of the individual in psychology. With the help of self-esteem, the behavior of the individual is regulated.
How does a person carry out self-esteem? K. Marx owns a fair idea: a person first looks, as in a mirror, into another person. Only by treating the man Paul as his own kind does the man Peter begin to treat himself as a man. In other words, knowing the qualities of another person, a person receives the necessary information that allows him to develop his own assessment. In other words, a person is guided by a certain reference group (real or ideal), whose ideals are his ideals, interests - his interests, etc. e. In the process of communication, she constantly checks herself against the standard and, depending on the results of the check, turns out to be satisfied with herself or dissatisfied. Too high or too low self-esteem can become an internal source of personality conflicts. Of course, this conflict can manifest itself in different ways.
Inflated self-esteem leads to the fact that a person tends to overestimate himself in situations that do not give a reason for this. As a result, he often encounters opposition from others who reject his claims, becomes embittered, shows suspicion, suspiciousness and deliberate arrogance, aggression, and in the end may lose the necessary interpersonal contacts, become isolated.
Excessively low self-esteem may indicate the development of an inferiority complex, persistent self-doubt, refusal of initiative, indifference, self-blame and anxiety.
In order to understand a person, it is necessary to clearly imagine the action of unconsciously developing forms of controlling a person's behavior, pay attention to the entire system of assessments that a person characterizes himself and others, and see the dynamics of changes in these assessments.
Back to section
